3 ms·
“Literature” is definitely not the opposite of “concise.”
by baddox 8y ago
“Literature” is definitely not the opposite of “concise.”
- mikestew 8y agoGood thing, too, because that wasn’t my point. If you want the TL;DR, The New Yorker probably isn’t for you. It is, of course, more nuanced than that and leaving less room for snapping one-liner comebacks, but such is the world of low attention spans that we live in.
- snowwrestler 8y agoTrue but the point of literature is not just to deliver factual information as quickly as possible. By analogy, you can drive to the top of Mt. Washington, but people still hike it. Either way will deliver the view from top, but each will be a distinct experience.
- all2 8y agoI think Michael Crichton is a good example of this. He has (had) an incredibly terse style that still manages to communicate quite a lot of information/imagery.
- WheelsAtLarge 8y agoExactly, literature can be both artful and to the point or at least insightful.